CORNISH  TO  EVANS 

An  Open  Letter  to  R.  C.  Evans 


By  J.  J.  CORNISH 


Printed  by 
*     THE   HERALD   PUBLISHING  HOUSE, 
LAMONI,  IOWA 

10  for  25  cents;  100  for  $2. 


Cornish  to  Evans 


New  Westminster,  British  Columbia. 

Mr.  R.  C.  Evans, 

Toronto,  Ontario. 

Dear  Brother:  Your  letter  and  papers  came  to  this  place 
about  three  months  ago.  I  was  many  miles  away  at  the 
time  of  their  arrival.  The  letter  was  forwarded,  but  the 
papers  remained  here  until  I  returned  a  few  days  ago. 

In  your  letter  you  say,  "There  is  no  man  living  that  I 
would  sooner  see  come  out  of  the  Mormon  delusion  than 
Johnnie  Cornish."  You  also  say,  "I  have  had  my  eyes  opened 
to  the  fact  that  Joseph  Smith  was  an  adulterer,  liar,  polyg- 
amist,  false  prophet,  etc."  Now,  Richard,  you  and  I  have 
had  to  meet  such  assertions  for  many  years,  and  we  met 
them  successfully,  and  all  agreed  that  if  Joseph  Smith,  who 
had  been  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  Almighty  in 
restoring  the  everlasting  gospel,  had  fallen,  it  would  not 
prove  that  the  gospel  was  not  true,  but  that  he  had  proven 
false  to  the  gospel  and  God. 

In  your  letter  of  February  26,  1919,  you  say,  "Johnnie,  I 
have  not  left  a  single  principle  of  the  gospel  that  you  taught 
me."  Why,  Richard,  I  taught  you  that  the  Scriptures  said 
the  gospel  as  formerly  taught  was  lost  and  had  been  re- 
stored, with  all  its  gifts  and  blessings,  by  the  hand  of  an 
angel;  that  the  record  containing  a  history  of  the  aborigines 
of  this  country,  also  the  gospel  as  taught  in  the  Bible,  had 
been  restored  and  translated  by  the  gift  and  power  of  God, 
through  Joseph  Smith,  the  latter-day  prophet.  You  now 
tell  me  that  "the  gospel  will  save  without  the  Book  of  Mor- 
mon." The  gospel  will  save  without  the  Bible,  Book  of 
Mormon,  or  any  other  book.  Holy  men  of  God  in  ancient 
time?  who  never  had  the  Bible  or  Book  of  Mormon,  "spake 


I  III  .   IWJ,-.  '\\i  )     ■ 

as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  were  saved 
through  obedience  to  the  principles,  although  they  never  saw 
a  Bible  or  Book  of  Mormon.  But  now  these  books  are  given 
that  the  gospel  might  be  preached  in  all  the  world  by  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  convince  both  the  Jew  and  the 
Gentile  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ.  This  you  have  taught  for 
nearly  forty  years,  and  now  you  deny  the  Book  of  Mormon, 
the  Doctrine  and  Covenants,  and  all  inspiration  revealed  as 
in  former  ages.  Is  this  not  going  back  on  the  principles  I 
taught  you?  In  this,  are  you  not  inconsistent?  Faith,  re- 
pentance, and  baptism  are  only  the  initiatory  principles  into 
the  church. 

Your  assertions  regarding  Joseph  Smith  are  not  proof  of 
what  you  say.  If  he  was  as  bad  as  you  say,  and  as  many 
as  you  mention  knew  of  it  and  left  the  church  because  of 
his  wickedness,  and  became  his  bitter  enemies,  why  did  they 
not  have  him  arrested,  brought  before  the  authorities  of  his 
country,  bring  forth  those  witnesses  who  claimed  to  know 
so  much,  and  have  him  tried  before  a  lawful  tribunal?  This 
they  could  have  done  either  before  the  courts  of  the  church 
or  the  country.  Would  they  not  have  done  so  if  they  had 
had  the  proof?  See  how  many  witnesses  were  brought  be- 
fore Judge  Philips  to  testify  in  the  Temple  Lot  Case,  and 
they  brought  forth  the  best  they  had,  and  sopie  when  exam- 
ined were  clearly  proven  to  have  borne  false  testimony. 
Richard,  if  Joseph  Smith  could  not  be  proven  an  adulterer, 
liar,  polygamist,  false  prophet,  etc.,  while  he  was  living,  it 
is  useless  for  you  to  attempt  to  prove  it  now  seventy-five 
years  after  he  is  dead. 

It  was  safe  for  you  to  challenge  President  Frederick  M. 
Smith  to  debate  on  polygamy  when  you  knew  he  would  not 
lower  the  dignity  of  the  church  by  debating  on  ^^question 
already  settled  by  Judge  Philips  in  the  United  States  Cir- 
cuit Court.  Debating  and  quibbling  could  never  alter  that 
decision,  which  reads  as  follows:  "Certainly nt  [polygamy — 
J.  J.  C]  was  never  promulgated,  taught^  nor  recognized,  as 
a  doctrine  of  the  church  prior  to  the  assumption  of  Brigham 
Young."    (Temple  Lot  Case,  pp.  20-26.) 

As   collateral   with   the   decision   of  Judge   Philips   I  wish 


to  add  the  statement  made  by  a  bishop  (?)  residing  in  To- 
ronto, Ontario,  thus:  "There  is  not  a  single  word  in  all  the 
sermons,  lectures,  editorials,  books,  or  other  literature  pub- 
lished during  the  lifetime  of  Joseph  Smith  wherein  he,  by 
a  single  word  endorsed  the  doctrine  of  polygamy."  (Evans 
versus  McKenzie,  p.  9.) 

In  your  letter  to  me  of  the  year  before  you  say:  "All  we 
can  say  is,  God  revealed  to  us  the  truthfulness  of  the  gospel 
and  has  confirmed  it  to  us  in  a  thousand  ways,"  all  of  which 
knowledge  you  obtained  many  years  after  the  prophet's 
death.  Now  all  at  once  when  your  official  actions  are  called 
in  question  by  the  authorities  of  the  church,  whose  duty  it  is 
to  regulate  and  set  in  order,  your  thousand  evidences  re- 
garding the  divinity  of  the  gospel  suddenly  become  false. 

You  call  me  your  father  in  the  gospel  because  I  preached 
to  you  and  baptized  you  over  forty  years  ago.  Will  you 
tell  me  then,  my  son,  how  it  is  that  you  with  joy  received 
the  teaching,  with  gladness  obeyed  it,  and  being  called  and 
ordained  from  one  office  to  another  in  which  you  defended 
the  prophet  and  the  message  the  angel  brought  to"  him,  and 
his  successors  in  office,  right  up  until  May  of  last  year,  1918, 
and  did  not  get  your  eyes  open  until  June,  1918,  when  an 
investigation  of  aifairs  in  Toronto  was  taking  place?  This 
work  being  true,  according  to  your  own  attestation — both 
verbal  and  written,  in  public  and  in  private  for  forty  years — 
can  you  tell  me  how  it  could  become  false  all  at  once  in 
June  of  last  year? 

My  son  Richard,  you  say,  "I  was  wrapped  in  glory"  and 
saw  those  men  "in  vision" — those  men  whom  you  now  slan- 
der— dead  men  who  cannot  now  answer  for  themselves.  You 
give  the  names  of  "Joseph  the  Seer"  as  well  as  "Hyrum 
Smith,  his  brother."  Will  you  explain  how  that  prophet  and 
patriarch  could  be  in  such  a  "most  gorgeous  park  or  garden 
with  majestic  trees,  pretty  flowers,  verdant  slopes,  and  mur- 
muring waters,"  if  they  were  such  wicked  men  as  you  now 
represent  them  to  be?  You  also  say  that  with  those  two 
men  were  "our  Joseph,  Alexander,  and  David.*'  Those  men 
all  lived  and  died  in  our  time.  They  were  known  to  be  good, 
honorable  men  all  their  lives  and  died  honored  and  respected 

4 


by  all  who  knew  them.  Also  in  that  vision  you  say  you  saw 
Jesus  "in  their  company."  Will  all  of  those  men  "be  known 
by  the  company  they  keep,"  too,  or  will  Jesus  be  judged  (in 
your  estimation)  by  the  company  he  keeps?  Perhaps  you 
can  tell  me  now  you  have  "your  eyes  opened." 

You  say,  "I  know  that  in  London,  and  at  different  times 
since,  your  faith  has  been  rudely  shaken  in  many  things,  and 
were  it  not  for  the  power  of  God  that  attended  your  gospel 
administrations,  you  would  have  denied  Mormonism  long  ago." 
Oh  yes!  I  remember  well  when  Mr.  Stephen  Post,  about  the 
only  elder  left  of  the  Rigdonite  faction  when  it  broke  up, 
claimed  that  when  Joseph  and  Hyrum  were  killed  Sid- 
ney Rigdon  was  the  only  one  left  alive  of  the  presidency 
and  he  should  have  been  acknowledged  as  the  head  of  the 
church  until  young  Joseph  came  to  the  proper  age  to  take  his 
father's  place  as  prophet,  seer,  and  revelator.  This  looked 
good  to  me  and  it  caused  me  to  think.  When  I  explained  to 
him  the  wonderful  manifestations  I  had  received  and  asked 
how  those  blessings  came  if  this  was  not  the  right  church, 
Mr.  Post  talked  kindly  to  me  and  reasoned  to  the  effect  that 
God  would  bless  me  in  the  manner  in  which  he  did,  to  keep 
me  in  the  faith  until  such  time  as  in  the  mind  of  God  he 
would  send  some  one  to  get  me  in  the  true  church.  But,  dear 
brother,  do  not  forget  that  at  that  time  I  was  young,  unedu- 
cated, and  had  no  experience  with  men  or  their  way  of  work- 
ing. I  looked  to  men  who  had  years  of  experience  to  know 
more  than  I  who  had  had  no  experience.  But  I  did  not  leave 
the  church;  I  worked  away  and  continued  to  receive  blessings 
from  the  Lord,  and  I  labored  with  all  the  faith  I  had. 

Again  my  faith  was  tried  when  Wingfield  Watson  pre- 
sented the  claims  of  J.  J.  Strang,  viz.,  "The  very  day  and 
hour  and  minute  that  Joseph  Smith  was  shot,  the  angel  laid 
hands  on  J.  J.  Strang  and  ordained  him  prophet,  seer,  and 
revelator,"  but  I  did  not  leave  the  church. 

When  William  Carleton  Irish  came  through  London,  On- 
tario, which  you  no  doubt  very  well  remember,  my  faith  was 
also  tried.  This  man  was  ordained  by  Brother  Joseph  and  H. 
A.  Stebbins  to  the  office  of  priest,  at  Piano,  Illinois.  Brother 
Irish  would  have  us  believe  that  the  resurrection  was  coinc 


on  all  the  time;  that  every  now  and  then  God  would  raise 
one  of  the  old  prophets,  etc.,  until  manj^  of  us  believed  he 
was  a  great  man.  Some  said  they  felt  sure  he  was  one  of 
the  old  prophets  raised  from  the  dead,  he  wore  long  hair  as 
they  did. 

There  were  many  things  said  by  him  that  we  believed,  and 
there  were  other  things  said  that  caused  us  to  w^onder.  But 
there  were  six  points  of  difference  between  us,  which  I,  be- 
ing president  of  the  branch,  refused  to  allow  him  to  preach 
as  the  doctrine  of  the  church,  until  we  heard  from  the  presi- 
dent of  the  church.  The  majority,  in  opposition,  voted  that 
he  be  allowed  to.  go  on.  These  six  points  of  difference  were 
written.  Brother  Irish  placing  his  name  favoring  each  point 
and  I  signing  my  name  as  opposed  to  those  teachings.  When 
word  came  back  from  Brethren  Joseph  Smith  and  W.  W. 
Blair,  saying  I  was  right.  Brother  Irish  ceased  to  preach 
and  left  the  city. 

Richard,  while  these  trials  were  going  on,  I  tried  to 
know  the  facts  and  stand  by  them,  as  Brother  Blair  at  that 
time  said,  "Brother  John,  be  sure  you  are  right,  then  stick 
to  it  if  the  heavens  fall."  I  did  not  leave  the  church  and 
start  one  of  my  own.  I  at  that  time  said  many  hard  things 
against  the  church  (see  Joseph  Luff's  autobiography),  but  I 
fasted  and  prayed  to  God  to  lead  and  direct  me  and  give  me 
good  assurance.     I  obtained  it  and  kept  the  faith. 

This,  'dear  Brother  Evans,  should  have  been  your  attitude, 
and  when  the  time  of  the  investigation  of  your  work  in  Tor- 
onto came,  you  should  have  stood  by  the  truth  and  in  humil- 
ity acknowledged  whatever  you  might  have  done  that  was  ir- 
regular or  out  of  order,  and  have  moved  along  in  harmony 
with  the  authority  God  has  placed  in  the  church  for  the  di- 
recting and  regulating  of  the  affairs  of  the  same,  instead  of 
turning  around  and  denying  the  truth  of  the  angel's  mes- 
sage. But  when  things  did  not  come  your  way,  you  state  in 
your  letter  to  me,  "the  church  shall  tremble."  O  my  son,  how 
cruel!  You,  who  for  nearly  forty  years  was  a  preacher  of 
that  gospel — the  truthfulness  of  which  had  been  "revealed  to 
you  in  a  thousand  ways" — could  not  humble  yourself  enough 
to  say  before  that  committee    (who  were  working  for  your 

6 


good  and  that  of  the  church)  three  little  words,  '7  was 
wrong."  But  because  you  did  not  agree  with  the  investigat- 
ing committee  you  not  only  pour  out  a  tirade  of  abuse  and 
slander  against  them,  but  against  the  honorable  dead,  even 
him  whom  you  called  "our  Joseph,"  "Joseph  the  Just" — whom 
you  say  never  went  to  bed  with  you  a  night  in  England,  Ire- 
land, Scotland,  Canada,  Wales,  or  the  United  States  that  he 
did  not  kiss  you  good-night — and  against  the  church  in 
general. 

You  then  left  the  church,  drew  all  you  could  with  you  and 
had  the  audacity  to  ask  me  to  leave  this  beautiful  restored 
gospel,  which  I  love  so  much  and  know  to  be  true,  to  join  one 
Df  your  making.  When  Satan  left  heaven  he  drew  about  one 
third  part  of  the  angels  with  him.  When  you  left,  how  many 
Saints  did  you  draw  away  after  you?  Those  angels  kept  not 
their  "first  estate."  I  am  sorry  that  you  and  those  who  fol- 
lowed you  could  not  have  kept  your  second  estate.  My  boy,  if 
you  had  only  remembered  your  boyhood  days  and  the  game 
of  ball,  that  "over  the  fence  is  out,"  you  would  have  been 
more  careful  how  you  struck  that  ball. 

Over  a  hundred  thousand  people,  in  and  out  of  the  church, 
wonder  why  such  a  change  should  come,  and  just  at  a  time 
when  your  official  acts  were  being  investigated.  Let  Jesus 
answer  it:  "And  whosoever  shall  exalt  himself  shall  be 
abased."  If  I  ever  saw  the  spirit  of  exaltation  in  any  man 
in  my  life,  I  saw  it  in  you  when  you.  attended  our  conference 
in  South  Boardman,  Michigan.  You  boasted  of  what  a 
great  man  you  were,  and  of  what  you  were  doing  and  then 
displayed  a  long  railway  ticket,  entitling  you  to  go  through 
Michigan,  Manitoba,  Saskatchewan,  Alberta,  British  Colum- 
bia, then  in  United  States,  Washington,  through  Utah,  etc., 
and  back  to  Toronto   (this  and  more  as  I  remember  it). 

Then  repeatedly  in  your  letters  written  to  many,  you  told 
how  you  were  ordained  to  this  office  and  then  to  that,  up  to 
the  First  Presidency;  how  many  countries  you  had  preached 
in;  how  you  had  dared  and  defied  the  world  to  meet  you  to 
prove  this  is  not  the  work  of  God.  What  can  they  now 
conclude  but  that  if  you  are  telling  the  truth  now,  you  were 
not   telling  the   truth   before  the  public  for  the   last  forty 


years.  But  the  gospel  being  the  truth  for  forty  years  (you 
cannot  now  prove  it  false),  if  you  continue  in  your  present 
work  against  that  forty  years'  work  of  truth,  you  will,  no 
doubt,  using  your  own  words,  be  accused  of  "perambulating 
around  the  suburbs  of  veracity  and  economizing  the  truth." 

In  your  letters  to  me  a  spirit  of  exaltation  has  been  con- 
stantly manifest.  Jesus'  words  are  true:  '"'And  whosoever 
shall  exalt  himself  shall  be  abased." 

There  is  a  sin  for  which,  if  men  commit  and  repent  not, 
"they  will  deny  the  faith."  My  son,  where  hast  thou  been? 
What  have  you  done?  How  art  thou  fallen !  'Had  you  lived 
up  to  the  requirements  of  the  gospel  brought  by  the  angel, 
being  "humble  and  full  of  love,"  you  would  have  been  in 
the  church  yet.  There  is  no  cause  for  men  or  women  to  fall 
and  deny  the  faith  when  they  are  willing  to  keep  the  cove- 
nants and  commandments  with  an  eye  single  to  the  glory  of 
God.     He  will  make  a  way  for  their  escape. 

The  changes  you  speak  of  in  the  Book  of  Mormon  are  all 
published  in  the  Herald  with  full  explanations.  Everything 
was  done  in  good  faith,  open  and  aboveboard,  by  the  au- 
thority of  the  body.  The  corrections  made  were  only  of  such 
words  as  and,  the,  which,  who,  etc.    This  you  very  well  know. 

You  are  unfair,  Richard,  in  your  manner  of  criticism. 
You  bring  up  things  done  by  apostates  like  yourself-^un- 
reliable  evidences — compiling  and  publishing  them  against 
an  innocent  people,  to  carry  out  your  wicked  designs. 

Why  boast  of  what  you  have  done  and  how  high  you  had 
gone  in  authority,  and  of  the  honors  which  had  been  placed 
upon  you,  using  your  own  words  of  March,  1917:  "This 
honor  has  never  been  conferred  upon  another  and  it  hurts 
some  of  them."  Had  you  gone  on  in  faithfulness,  being 
humble  and  full  of  love,  those  honors  would  have  remained. 
When  your  actions  were  called  in  question  and  you  had  full 
opportunity  to  explain  and  defend  yourself,  you  were  not 
able  to  do  so,  and  could  not  bring  one  thing  against  the 
president  of  the  church,  who  had  conferred  such  honors 
upon  you.  You  then  turn  around  and  abuse  him  and  the 
church,  both  the  living  and  the  dead.  What  an  eye.  opener! 
Then,  after  speaking  so  disrespectfully  of  him,  both  in  pub- 

8 


lie  and  private  and.  by  correspondence  all  over  the  country, 
you  send  him  by  telegraph,  that  ^'Christmas  Greeting,"  De- 
cember 24,  1917.  O  consistency!  It  is  said  "thou  art  a  jewel," 
but  thy  name  is  not  R.  C.  Evans. 

Say,  Richard,  I  wish  you  would  tell  me  at  about  what  time 
you  got  your  eyes  opened.  Was  it  when  the  president  was 
conferring  such  honor  upon  you,  or  when  you  were  slandering 
him  so;  or  did  it  occur  the  morning  you  sent  him  that 
Christmas  greeting;  or  was  it  a  few  months  later  when 
your  official  actions  were  called  in  question?     Please  answer. 

Sidney  Rigdon  claimed  to  be  a  prophet  and  leader,  but  his 
work  went  down.  J.  J.  Strang  claimed  that  he  saw  angels 
and  the  "very  day  and  hour  and  minute  that  Joseph  was 
shot,"  the  angel  laid  hands  on  him  and  ordained  him 
"prophet,  seer,  and  revelator."  But  it  all  fell  to  the  ground. 
David  Whitmer  said,  "Brethren,  if  you  believe  me  when  I 
tell  you  I  saw  the  angel  and  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord 
commanding  me  to  bear  testimony,"  etc.,  "believe  me  when 
I  tell  you  I  heard  the  voice  of  God  telling  me  to  come  out 
from  among  the  Latter  Day  Saints,"  and  that  he  was  "called 
to  hold  the  priesthood,"  but  he  went  down  to  the  grave  with- 
out conferring  it  on  any  one  else.  (I  quote  from  memory.) 
Jojin  Zahnd  also  claims  that  he  had  visions,  etc.,  but  it  will 
likewise  go  down.  Your  institution  cannot  stand  now  nor 
in  the  day  of  accounts. 

That  the  wonderful  truths  you  taught  for  nearly  forty 
years,  how  that  God  did  "scatter  the  people,"  from  the  time 
of  the  building  of  the  city  and  tower,  "upon  the  face  of  all 
the  earth"  when  some  came  upon  this  continent,  must  now 
become  a  falsehood  the  minute  you  "got  your  eyes  opened," 
is  wonderful!  Then  the  other  colonies  who  came  over  later 
and  who  inhabited  this  continent  600  years  before  Christ, 
which  you  were  successful  in  proving  hundreds  of  times,  up 
until  the  last  of  May,  all  at  once,  in  June  of  the  same  year, 
becomes  a  fable.  What  an  eye  opener!  The  "other  sheep" 
that  Jesus  had  over  here  that  did  not  belong  to  that  fold  at 
Jerusalem  and  "they  shall  hear  my  voice,"  and  whom  he  did 
visit  and  preach  to,  and  amongst  whom  he  established  his 
church,  was  a  fact  from  32  A.  D.  until  the  last  of  May,. 1918, 

9 


when  it  suddenly  becomes  a  delusion.  These  four  brothers 
who  came  over  from  the  old  world,  of  whom  history  as  w-ell 
as  the  Book  of  Mormon  says  the  younger  became  the  leader, 
is  "rot.''  All  of  those  roads,  caves,  mounds,  and  cities  uiiich 
have  been  unearthed  and  which  confirm  the  truthfulness  of 
the  Book  of  Mormon  do  not  now  exist  because  R,  C.  got  "his 
eyes  open."  Can  this  be?  No!  They  still  exist.  The  Book 
of  Mormon  proven  by  the  Bible  and  archaeology,  and  R.  C. 
and  thousands  of  others  for  many  years  cannot  now  be  false. 
Moses  and  other  prophets,  including  David,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel, 
etc.,  who  declared  the  book  must  come  and  before  "Lebanon" 
should  become  a  "fruitful  field"  and  "our  land"  (Jerusalem) 
shall  "yield  her  increase,"  must  not  be  considered  untrue 
because  the  "Bishop"  (?)  R.  C.  has  got  his  "eyes  opened." 
When  Adam  and  Eve  transgressed  they  got  their  "eyes 
opened,"  too.     They  saw  their  shame.     Can  you  see  yours? 

Do  not  be  angry,  Richard.  I  am  just  giving  you  a  little 
medicine  of  your  own  mixing.  You  are  mistaken  in  your 
idea  that  by  your  manner  of  procedure  "the  church  shall 
tremble.'  It  is  you  who  are  trembling.  That  other  fellow 
who  was  the  "accuser  of  the  brethren,"  trembled,  too. 

Now,  after  all  this  you  say,  "Help  me  in  this  great  work." 
Did  you  think  that  I  was  one  altogether  as  thou,  Richard? 
I  have  a  great  work  to  do  and  I  cannot  come  down.  Again 
you  say,  "Help  me.''  Please  go  back  with  me  to  our  early 
days  in  the  church.  Shortly  after  you  came  into  it  you  were 
acting  with  a  theatrical  company  on  the  stage,  and  when 
the  officials  of  the  London  Branch  w^ere  urging  me  to  ap- 
point a  court  to  try  your  case  I  hung  back,  thinking  that 
at  that  tim.e  if  a  court  were  held  you  would  likely  be  ex- 
pelled. When  you  were  in  our  conference  at  South  Board- 
man,  you  told  them  that  I  was  your  father  in  the  gospel 
and  had  saved  you  to  the  church,  for  if  they  had  attempted 
to  try  you  at  that  time  you  would  have  said  to  them,  "Go 
to  hell."  I  would  like  to  save  you  now,  but  I  fear  that 
it  is  too  late. 

You  will  likewise  remember  that  I  advised  the  brethren  to 
give  time  and  God  would  bring  you  back,  and  that  you 
w^ould  yet  "stand  in  the  Quorum  of  Twelve,  and  perhaps  in 

10 


the  Presidency."  You  have  repeatedly  said  that  while  upon 
the  stage  the  hand  of  power  was  placed  upon  your  shoulders 
and  God  called  you  back. 

Before  you  went  into  the  Quorum  of  Twelve,  I  told  you 
that  it  was  revealed  to  me  that  you  were  going  there  and 
at  the  time  of  your  call,  you,,  in  your  statement  of  acceptance, 
referred  to  me  as  giving  proof  of  your  calling.  Your  state- 
ment was  published  in  the  Herald  at  the  time. 

You  and  I  roomed  together  in  Detroit,  Michigan,  while 
I  was  laboring  there  and  I  told  you  that  you  would  soon  be 
put  in  the  First  Presidency.  Then  said  I,  "Look  out!  I 
fear  your  fall,  and  if  you  fall  you  will  fall  heavily."  This 
has  all  come  to  pass. 

After  you  got  Brother  George  Mottashed  out  of  the  church, 
he  revealed  to  me  the  vision  God  gave  him  of  you  about 
thirty-five  years  ago.  It  was  that  you  would  go  into  the 
Quorum  of  Twelve,  then  in  the  First  Presidency,  and  that 
you  would  fall  from  it,  and  he  said,  "John,  I  will  not  live 
to  see  it,  but  you  will."     It  came  to  pass. 

My  son  Richard,  if  what  we  have  preached  all  of  our 
lives  was  a  delusion,  how  did  it  happen  that  in  answer  to 
prayer,  God  revealed  to  me  that  this  was  his  work,  and  that 
he  would  and  did  heal  my  affliction?  That  manifestation  is 
still  with  me.  I  cannot  doubt  it.  How  can  you  condemn  that 
which  has  been  revealed  to  you  in  "a  thousand  ways"?  What 
kind  of  a  manifestation  have  you  had,  anyway?  Will  you 
take  that  one  as  superior  to  the  "thousand"  and  it  directly 
opposite?     Has  your  light  entirely  gone  out? 

Can  you  look  back  to  the  time  when  we  were  baptizing  in 
London,  in  December  of  1876,  when  that  light,  with  a  sound 
like  a  rushing,  mighty  wind,  came  down  from  heaven  and 
encircled  about  thirty  people,  members  and  nonmembers,  also 
taking  in  the  portion  of  the  river  where  we  were  baptizing? 
A  voice  spoke  to  Brother  Clow  telling  him,  "These  are  my 
people.  You  must  not  laugh  at  them."  When  standing  in 
that  brightest  and  most  brilliant  light  I  ever  saw,  and  rais- 
ing my  hand  to  perform  that  ceremony,  to  me  came  the 
words  (not  audibly),  "Yes,  you  have  been  commissioned." 
Oh,  Richard,  my  son!     Never  shall  I  forget  it!     That  Spirit 

11 


thrills  my  body  as  I  write  to  you.  Those .  words,  "These 
are  my  people,  you  must  not  laugh  at  them,"  are  true  and 
never  can  be  false.  The  church  acknowledged  of  God  then 
is  his  church  now  though  thousands  fall.  Tempt  me  not  to 
leave  it,  dear  brother.     I  never  can. 

Can  you  or  I  discard  the  power  that  healed  that  Mr.  Ray 
(not  a  member),  who  fell  backward  into  the  kettle  of  boil- 
ing glue,  which  burned  him  so  that  part  of  his  intestines 
came  out,  and  pieces  of  skin  and  flesh  came  off?  By  the 
administration  of  Brethren  'Harrington,  Mottashed,  Luff, 
and  myself,  God  healed  him.  New  skin  and  flesh  grew  on 
and  he  became  strong  and  able  to  work  as  before.  You 
knew  of  it. 

Then  Brother  Harvey  who  had  two  fingers  cut  off — the 
blood  stopped  and  he  was  healed  by  administration,  which 
is  according  to  the  pattern  of  the  gospel  of  Christ  and  as 
restored  in  these  last  days,  to  Joseph  Smith  the  prophet,  and 
"his  seed  and  his  seed's  seed,  forever,"  as  saith  the  Prophet 
Isaiah.  0  Richard,  think  of  scores  of  cases  under  our  ad- 
ministration, there  and  elsewhere.  It  is  just  the  same  to- 
day, and  the  power  of  God,  as  we  live  nearer  to  him,  will 
be  greater  by  and  by. 

You  say,  "Write  to  me,"  and  "as  you  profess  to  love  me." 
I  did  love  you  and  do  yet,  but  I  am  sorry,  that  you  have 
fallen  so  low  and  now  try  to  slander  the  men  God  sent,  and 
who  were  instruments  in  his  hands  in  restoring  the  gospel 
and  making  it  possible  for  salvation  to  come  to  us. 

In  your  "Epitome  of  the  faith  and  doctrines  of  the  Church 
of  Jesus  Christ,"  you  have  nothing  we  did  not  have,  and  we 
have  all  the  balance  God  sent  in  restoration  which  you  can- 
not have.  If  you  can  be  saved  by  that  part  (without  the 
authority  to  administer  it),  I  will  not  be  "damned"  by  keep- 
ing all. 

My  son,  Richard  C.  Evans,  and  (once)  brother  in  Christ, 
(now  fallen),  I  do  not  know  that  you  saw  an  angel  because 
you  say  so,  but  I  know  no  angel  sent  from  God  would  tell 
you  to  leave  the  church  of  his  planting  and  start  one  of 
your  own.  (I  do  not  know  how  much  the  Devil  had  to  do  in 
that  matter.)      If  there  w^as  anything  between  you  and  the 

12 


officers  of  the  church,  God  would  assist  you  to  get  it  right, 
and  if  they  were  so  far  wrong  that  he  would  need  to  take 
a  hand  in  rectifying  and  had  to  send  an  angel  to  do  it,  that 
angel  would  have  told  you  to  stay  in  the  church,  go  before 
the  proper  quorums  or  the  General  Conference  and  assist  in 
correcting  the  error.  God  will  never  reject  over  80,000 
Saints  because  you  refuse  to  have  your  official  acts  corrected. 

J.  J.  Cornish. 


New  Westminster,  British  Columbia,  July  3,  1919. 

Mr.  R.  C.  Evans, 

Toronto,  Ontario. 

Dear  Brother:  Your  letter  of  June  20,  1919,  is  at  hand 
and  its  contents  are  fully  noted.  The  first  thing  I  read  was 
the  printed  heading,  "Church  of  Jesus  Christ,"  then  in  the 
corner  at  the  end  of  the  word  Christ,  the  impression  of  a 
seal,  "The  Church  of  the  Christian  Brotherhood."  As  you 
gave  me  no  explanation  as  to  how  your  church  could  be  the 
"Church  of  Jesus  Christ"  and  at  the  same  time  "The  Church 
of  the  Christian  Brotherhood,"  I  was  left  to  ponder.  Then 
reading  your  statement  in  your  spiritual  manifestation  where 
you  say  "your  messenger"  said,  "And  now  I  am  commissioned 
to  command  you  to  organize  the  Church  of  Jesus  Christ" — 
caused  me  to  wonder  greatly. 

It  seems  when  you  could  not  get  the  church  incorporated 
by  the  name  your  messenger  commanded  ("The  Church  of 
Jesus  Christ") ,  you  deliberately  broke  the  command  of 
God(?)  given  by  that  commissioned  messenger  (?)  and  chris- 
tened it  by  another  name  ("The  Church  of  The  Christian 
Brotherhood")  without  either  God  or  Jesus  Christ  in  at  all. 
R.  C,  do  not  boast  about  getting  your  eyes  opened. 

That  you  were  for  over  forty  years  a  member  of  a  church 
organized  according  to  the  pattern  given"  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  and  lived  without  openly  breaking  any  special  com- 
mands, and  then  start  a  church  of  your  own  and  within  a 
few  months  break  the  first  command  your  messenger  gave 
you,  is  beyond  my  comprehension.  Richard,  what  is  th^ 
name  of  your  church,  anyway?     Is  it  "The  Church  of  Jesus 

13 


Christ,"  "Church  of  Jesus  Christ,"  or  is  it  "The  Church  of 
the  Christian  Brotherhood,"  or  do  you  know?  If  it  is  the 
latter  then  it  is  not  either  of  the  other  two. 

You  seem  to  be  much  disturbed  in  your  imagination  that 
my  letter  to  you  was  the  "work  of  other  minds."  You  say, 
"I  am  sorry  that  much  of  your  letter  is  the  work  of  other  ' 
minds,  .why  resort  to  such,  Johnnie,  is  it  fair?"  and,  "So 
much  for  the  silly  arguments  made  by  the  real  author  of 
the  letter  before  me."  Also,  "The  point  you  try  to  make, 
or  your  master  does  for  you."  Your  letter  is  filled  with 
twice  as  much  more  of  the  same  kind.  Richard,  I  framed  it 
all.  No  man  or  woman  ever  knew  that  I  was  writing  such 
a  letter  until  I  arranged  to  haf-e  it  typewritten. 

Again  you  say,  "Johnnie,  you  must  not  try  to  make  me 
believe  that  you  wrote  all  those  insulting  statements."  Noth- 
ing insulting,  Richard;  I  was  just  treating  on  facts.  The 
Devil  drew  away  one  third  and  I  asked  you  how  many  you 
drew  away.  You  did  not  tell  me  but  said,  "Johnnie,  do  not 
play  the  echo  on  that  again." 

Just  look  at  some  of  your  contradictory  statements  fol- 
lowing: "Johnnie,  wake  up";  "but,  John,  take  the  wool  off 
vour  eyes  and  look."  Then  the  following:  "Your  heart  has 
rebelled  and  your  eyes  have  been  opened,"  also,  "Johnnie,  if 
you  wish  to  stand  by  Mormonism  do  so,  but  your  eyes  are 
opened."  Then  you  turn  right  around  and  say,  "The  thick 
darkness  of  Mormonism  is  still  upon  you";  "you  are  still 
under  the  cloud."  R.  C,  you  are  of  course  the  "real  author." 
The  above  statements  are  not  "the  work  of  other  minds," 
are  they?     You  wrote  them. 

I  refuse  to  answer  your  slanderous  statements  about  mur- 
der, Danites,  polygamy,  liar?.  Book  of  Mormon,  Doctrine  and 
Covenants,  also  "those  manuscripts,"  etc.,  which  have  been 
answered  and  settled  long  ago  by  judges  and  ministers,  the 
latter  including  yourself.  I  will,  however,  make  reply  to  the 
following:  "Your  framer  makes  it  appear  that  the  vision 
showed  Joseph  Smith  and  the  rest  wath  Christ  in  paradise 
now.  That  is  a  lie  free  and  full."  Now,  just  read  that  part 
of  my  letter  over  again.  I  did  not  say  so.  I  simply  quoted 
your  own  statement  and  never  mentioned  paradise.     It  looks 

14 


to  me  that  in  this  you  are  willful,  making  up  that  false 
statement  and  then  saying  I  lied. 

You  explain  then,  "The  facts  are  that  vision  showed  me 
what  would  be  in  eternity,  not  now  in  paradise,  but  in  the 
future."  Ah,  yes,  I  see!  That  man  who  lived  and  died 
before  you  were  born,  whom  you  represented  for  forty  years 
as  a  pure,  prayerful  prophet  of  God,  and  who  all  at  once  in 
June,  1918,  became  a  murderer,  liar,  polygamist,  adulterer, 
etc.,  for  which  they  that  do  such  things  could  not  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  or  of  God  at  all  (Matthew  5:  20;  7:  21; 
1  Corinthians  6:  9-10;  Galatians  5:  21;  Ephesians  5:  5,  etc.), 
is  now  seen  in  your  vision  to  be  in  such  a  good  place  "in 
eternity,  not  now  in  paradise,  but  in  the  future."  Yes!  how 
singular!     Is  that  the  gospel  I  taught  you  forty  years  ago? 

You  make  one  statement  very  positive.  You  say,  "John, 
I  am  sorry  that  you  have  added  to  the  story  of  your  knowing 
th^t  I  was  going  into  the  Twelve  and  Presidency.  You 
did  bear  testimony  to  that,  but  the  part  about  my  falling  I 
never  heard  till  I  r^ad  it  in  your  letter."  I  am  glad  you  did 
not  deny  my  whole  statement.  Now,  my  son,  I  cannot  be 
mean  to  you,  neither  do  I  wish  to  add  one  thing  that  is  not 
true.  Our  Father  in  heaven  knows  that  there  is  enough 
against  you  already.  If  I  did  not  make  that  statement  I 
am  very  sorry  that  I  should  have  so  written.  We  were  in 
Detroit,  Michigan,  rooming  together  that  night,  and  I  very 
well  remember  that  at  the  time  you  cried  and  said,  "I  have 
enough  on  my  shoulders  now,  and  if  more  is  put  upon  me 
I  do  not  see  how  I  can  stand  up  under  it."  (Words  to  that 
effect.)  But  if  those  words  which  you  deny  were  not  ut- 
tered by  me  I  am  very  much  mistaken.  Let  it  pass.  I  will 
give  you  the  benefit  of  the  doubt. 

You  say,  "Your  statement  about  Mottashed  is  both  false 
and  silly."  I  reaffirm  Brother  Mottashed  did  tell  it  to  me, 
and  he  told  it  to  many  others  and  several  have  asked  me  if 
I  ever  heard  of  it.  No  doubt  many  who  are  yet  living 
know  of  it.  You  admit  my  statement  that  you  were  going 
into  the  Twelve  and  then  the  Presidency,  all  of  which  came 
to  pass. 

Jesus  had  an  apostle  in  his  day  who  turned  traitor.     "He 

15 


was  a  ,devil,"  and  yet  we  do  not  read  of  him  turning  around 
and  trying  to  drag  others  down  with  him,  as  you  have  tried 
to  do.  He  "went  and  hanged  himself."  Peter,  another 
apostle,  "denied  him,"  but  repented,  "went  out  -and  wept 
bitterly."  (Your  weeping  time  will  come.)  Also,  "all  the 
disciples  forsook  him  and  fled."  It  was  their  hour  of  trial, 
but  they  did  not  slander  and  abuse,  and  charge  all  manner 
of  crimes  against  the  church  as  you  have  done  and  are 
doing  against  over  eighty  thousand  people,  and  boast  that 
"When  I  speak  the  church  shall  tremble  and  the  world  shall 
feel  the  power."  Oh,  how  cruel!  How  inhuman  to  try  to 
make  a  church  of  over  eighty  thousand  innocent  people 
"tremble"  just  because  you  did  not  agree  with  two  or  th^ee 
of  its  leading  members. 

I  say  unto  you  as  Peter  said  to  his  son  in  the  gospel: 
"Repent  therefore  of  this  wickedness  and  pray  God,  if  per- 
haps the  thought  of  thy  hciart  may  be  forgiven  thee."  (Acts 
8:  22.) 

Oh,  Richard,  I  have  prayed  that  God  would  help  you  and 
have  mercy,  but  then  the  words  com.e  back  to  me,  "Mercy 
cannot  rob  justice." 

You  have  my  best  wishes. 

J.  J.  Cornish. 
16 


